evaluation of the long term efficacy of termitium® in ...€¦ · of termites through mortar...

EVALUATION OF THE LONG TERM EFFICACY OF

TERMITIUM® IN PREVENTING THE PENETRATION

OF TERMITES THROUGH MORTAR JOINTS

ONE STUDY, MANGROVE MOUNTAIN, NSW,

AUSTRALIA, 2008/2009/2010

Interim 3 - 2 Year Report

Submitted to: Clyde Freeman

Alterm National Pty Limited

75 Lambton Road

Broadmeadow NSW 2292

Submitted by: Agrisearch Services Pty Ltd

50 Leewood Drive

Orange NSW 2800

4/16 Jusfrute Drive

West Gosford NSW 2250

Project Manager: Ian Ridley

Experimenter: Ian Ridley

Reference Project: ALTERM/08/01, 080790

Report Number: ALTERM/08/01-interim3

Date Submitted: 21 November 2010

Agrisearch Services Report ALTERM/08/01-interim3

- CONTENTS -

Page Number

1. SUMMARY ..................................................................................3

2. INTRODUCTION .........................................................................5

3. EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS ......................................................6

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .................................................13

5. CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................17

6. APPENDICES .............................................................................18


1. SUMMARY

One small plot replicated field trial was conducted during November 2008 to November

2010 to evaluate the efficacy of TERMITIUM® for the prevention of termite penetration

through mortar joints over a 3 year period against termites of economic importance in the

building industry in Australia. The trial was conducted at Mangrove Mountain in the

central coast region of New South Wales Australia. This report contains the experimental

methods used and presents the results obtained for the first 2 years of the trial.

The following treatments were evaluated against Coptotermes acinaciformis:

Treatment

Dilution Rate

per mL/100 L

Application

Rate

L/m² of

Brickwork

Application

Timing

Days After

Bricks Laid

Replicates Code

1. TERMITIUM® Nil 1 L per 2m2 x 2

coats

7-14 days 5 6-10

2. Untreated control

NA No treatment NA 5 1-5

The treatments were applied by paint brush to 4 bricks and associated mortar joints for

each replicate as shown below:

Side View

Side Brick end

35.5 cm

Mortar 1.0-1.2 cm

Bricks 7.5 cm

Compressed fibro base 2.0 cm

Perspex sheet 10 mm

Top View

Bait

The Perspex sheet on all replicates of both treatments was fixed in place using Termite

Proof Silicone sealant.

The study was set up as a randomised complete block design with five (5) replicates at one

level in the soil, 8 cm to 20 cm. Five trenches having dimensions of 134 cm long x 25 cm

deep x 45 cm wide were excavated 2 to 3 m out from a tree with a confirmed active

healthy termite nest. Each trench was lined with pieces of radiata pine.


At 3 months, 12 months and 2 years after installation the treatments were carefully

removed from the trenches, with extreme care taken to avoid damaging them.

Individual treatment replicates were assessed for penetration and the timber (radiata pine)

bait inside the bricks and mortar was assessed for damage by recording the percentage

timber consumed by the termites. All mortar joints were assessed and any termite damage

to the mortar was recorded.

There was no damage to mortar on any of the TERMITIUM® treated mortar joints at 3

months, 12 months and 2 years after installation in termite infested soil.

All the TERMITIUM® treated bricks and mortar were dry compared to the untreated

bricks and mortar.

Moisture in the form of condensation under the Perspex in the centre of each of the 5 brick

constructions was greater in the untreated constructions compared to the TERMITIUM®

treated constructions.

Untreated replicate 2 and replicate 4 had mortar consumed by the termites to a depth of 5-

10 mm at one location at 3 months and by 12 months a total of 12 sites of damage to

untreated mortar were recorded. At 2 years there were 17 sites of damage to the untreated

mortar recorded. The deepest mortar penetration recorded was 78 mm.

There were no termites observed in the bait within the TERMITIUM® treated or the

untreated brick and mortar constructions at 3 months, 12 months and 2 years post-

installation.

The damage to the radiata timber pieces lining the trenches holding the treatments was

significant during the 3 month period of exposure to the natural termite population

foraging through the soil. Every piece of lining timber was damaged with greater than

50% of the timber consumed. At 12 months all timber pieces were again damaged by the

termites with greater than 95% of the timber consumed. At 2 years all timber pieces were

damaged with greater than 95% of the timber consumed.

The treatment of the bricks and mortar with TERMITIUM® increased the level of

hardness of the bricks and mortar at 3 months. The hardness of the mortar was tested

again at 2 years and the TERMITIUM® treated mortar remained harder than the untreated

mortar and maintained classification as an M4 mortar.


2. INTRODUCTION

One small plot replicated field trial was conducted during November 2008 to November

2010 to evaluate the efficacy of TERMITIUM® for the prevention of termite

(Coptotermes acinaciformis) penetration through mortar joints over a 3 year period against

termites of economic importance in the building industry in Australia. The trial was

conducted at Mangrove Mountain in the central coast region of New South Wales

Australia.

This report contains the experimental methods used and presents the results obtained for

the first 2 years of the trial.

The trial was conducted under Agrisearch Project ALTERM/08/01.


3. EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS

3.1 Site Details

Trial site details are presented below:

Co-operator Name Chris Eastwood

Property Name Eastwood Nurseries

Location Mangrove Mountain NSW Australia

Termite Genus and Species Coptotermes acinaciformis

Nest Situation Tree

Soil Type Brown sandy loam

Site History Bushland

Activities in 100 m radius Sheds, home, shade houses, tanks, dog kennels

Start Date Treated bricks and mortar on 23 October 2008, installed into ground on

12 November 2008

3 Month Assessment 11 February 2009

12 Month Assessment 11 November 2009

2 Year Assessment 11 November 2010

3.2 Treatment List

The following treatments were evaluated against Coptotermes acinaciformis:

Treatment

Dilution Rate

per mL/100 L

Application

Rate

L/m² of

Brickwork

Application

Timing

Days After

Bricks Laid

Replicates Code

1. TERMITIUM® Nil 1 L per 2m2 x 2

coats

7-14 days 5 6-10

2. Untreated control

NA No treatment NA 5 1-5

3.3 Formulations

TERMITIUM® – a single part formulation containing Styrene Acrylate Polymer and

Siloxane Hydrocarbon Solvent as marketed by Alterm National Pty Limited. The Batch

Number was 1A2/21.2/35/06/AUS20350 with a Date of Manufacture of 30/04/07.


3.4 Treatment Method

The treatments were applied by paint brush to 4 bricks and associated mortar joints as

shown in figure 1 below:

Figure 1:

Side View

Side Brick end

35.5 cm

Mortar 1.0-1.2 cm

Bricks 7.5 cm

Compressed fibro base 2.0 cm

Perspex sheet 10 mm

Top View

Bait

The bait inside the bricks, mortar, Perspex and compressed fibro structure consisted of a

block of radiata pine, a piece of corrugated cardboard and a piece of Styrofoam.

The Perspex sheet on all replicates of both treatment groups was fixed in place using

Termite Proof Silicone sealant, grey in colour and Lot# 0005171069 and a use by date of

Aug 2009.

3.5 Application Details

Date 23 Oct 08

Time of Day 1505-1630

Temperature 16.5°C

Relative Humidity 57%

Cloud Cover Indoors

Wind Indoors


3.6 Trial Design

The study was set up as a randomised complete block design with five (5) replicates at one

level in the soil, 8 cm to 20 cm. A trench having dimensions of 134 cm long x 25 cm deep

x 45 cm wide was excavated 2 to 3 m out from a tree with a confirmed active healthy

termite nest. Five lengths of trench were prepared to house the 2 treatments x 5 replicates

and they were positioned equidistant around the nest.

Each treatment replicate was 35.5 cm long x 35.5 cm wide x approximately 12 cm deep as

shown in Figure 1. There was a 20 cm spacing left between each replicate as well as at the

ends, therefore, each length of trench was 134 cm long.

The 25 cm deep x 45 cm wide trench was lined with pieces of radiata pine having

dimensions of, 40 cm long x 1.9 cm deep x 4.2 cm wide.

The gap between each piece of timber was around 0.5 cm so that termites could travel

easily through it. A length of soaker hose was placed in the base of the trench under the

timber lining for the entire length of the trench.

The end of the soaker hose in the trench was sealed and the other end was positioned

above the trench so that it could be fitted to a 20 L plastic drum of water. Trenches were

watered if there was a continuous dry period of 8 weeks.

A layer of soil approximately 3 cm deep was placed over the timber lining in the base of

the trench and then the treatment replicates were placed on top of the soil, 20 cm apart and

20 cm from each end and 5 cm from each side. Soil was placed into the trench until it

covered the block of replicates with approximately 3 cm of soil. Then another layer of

radiata pine timber was placed over the top of the soil and another 2-3 cm of soil was

placed over the layer of timber to bring it to ground level.

The soil was dampened after it was added to the trench each time using a new watering

can and new 20L plastic drums containing potable tap water.

A plastic sheet was placed over each completed block of treatments to help retain

moisture. The plastic sheet was completely covered with soil to secure it.


Figure 2:

Block 1 – Replicate 1 – Side view

Trt 2 1 Trt 1 6


Trt 1 7 Trt 2 2


Trt 2 3 Trt 1 8


Trt 1 9 Trt 2 4


Trt 2 5 Trt 1 10

Soil

Timber

Treated bricks and mortar


Following the 3 month assessment it was decided to get the timber closer to the bricks and

mortar joints to increase the termite activity immediately adjacent to the treated and

untreated units. The bottom layer of soil was not included and the treatments sat directly

on top of the timber. The timber ends were moved in to be positioned immediately

adjacent to the bricks and mortar and a piece of timber was placed along each side of the

treated and untreated bricks and mortar units. Therefore, each treated and untreated unit

had 8 pieces of timber (40 cm long x 1.9 cm deep x 4.2 cm wide) under them in contact

with the compressed fibro base, 2 pieces of timber on each end of the units and 1 piece of

timber along each side of the units either touching the bricks and mortar of the units or 1-2

cm away. Soil was place in on the units until it was approximately 2 cm above the

Perspex sheet, then 8 pieces of timber were placed on top of each unit.

Therefore, each treated and untreated unit had 22 pieces of timber in close proximity to

attract the termites.

3.7 Assessments

3.7.1 Efficacy

Efficacy was assessed at 3 months, 12 months and 2 years after installation. The

treatments were carefully removed from the trenches, with extreme care taken to avoid

damaging them. Individual treatment replicates were assessed for penetration and the

timber bait inside the bricks and mortar was assessed for damage by recording the

percentage timber consumed by the termites. All mortar joints were assessed and any

termite damage to the mortar was recorded.

Penetrated and damaged untreated replicates had the timber bait replaced, while any

penetrated and damaged TERMITIUM® treatments were not replaced.

Pieces of radiata pine timber lining damaged by termites was recorded and replaced.

The trenches were re-installed with the same treatment randomised complete block design

as at the start of the study and the same type of radiata timber lining and soil was re-

installed as it was at the start of the study.

3.7.2 Hardness of Bricks and Mortar

On the day of the 3 month assessment the hardness of the bricks and mortar of one

untreated and one TERMITIUM® treated construction was tested. Hardness testing was

conducted using a scratch test meter (MortarCheck). Three replications were tested on

both the bricks and mortar for each of the treatments. The hardness test was again

conducted on the mortar of one untreated and one TERMITIUM® treated construction at

the 2 year assessment.

3.8 Statistical Analysis

Statistical analyses were not required due to no recorded bait damage.


3.9 Building Code of Australia

In the opinion of Agrisearch Services Pty Ltd, the systems described and installed under

the conditions listed in this Technical Assessment will satisfy the Performance

Requirements BP1.1 and BP1.2 (Volume 1 – Class 2-9 buildings) P2.1 and QLD P2.1.1

(Volume 2 – Class 1 and Class 10 buildings Housing Provisions) of the Building Code of

Australia (2009). This declaration is only relevant for the system as described in this

Technical Assessment and installed under the conditions listed in this Technical

Assessment.

To meet the requirements of Clause P2.1.1 (relevant to QLD only) (Volume 2 – Class 1

and Class 10 buildings) of the Building Code of Australia (2009), the applicant has

provided a declaration of system design life, which is set out in the Durability section of

this Technical Assessment (3.11). This declaration is only relevant for the system as

described in this Technical Assessment and installed under the conditions listed in this

Technical Assessment.

Notes:

(1) The inclusion of this clause with reference to the BCA is aimed at assisting those

involved in the design, specifying and building approval/permit process to relate the

Appraisal to the relevant Performance Requirements of the BCA.

(2) Any changes made to the BCA will be reviewed during the term of this Technical

Assessment.

(3) AS 3660.1-2000 is referenced by the BCA as a deemed to satisfy solution for the

protection against concealed entry by subterranean termites.

3.10 Relevant Documents

Alterm National Pty Ltd, ‘Installation Instructions for Termitium System’ (10th

October

2009).

Standards Australia, AS 2870-1996 ‘Residential slabs and footings - Construction’ (Amdt

4 May 2003).

Standards Australia, AS 3660.1-2000 ‘Termite management – New building work’.

Standards Australia, AS 3660.3-2000 ‘Termite management – Assessment criteria for

termite management systems’.

Standards Australia, AS 3700-2001 (including amendments) ‘Masonry structures’.


3.11 Durability

Agrisearch Services Pty Ltd does not assess the durability of termite barriers.

The applicant, Alterm National Pty Ltd, declare under its sole responsibility that:

The TERMITIUM® Physical Termite Barrier has been designed to achieve a service

life of 50 years during which period the TERMITIUM® Physical Termite Barrier,

including its constituent components, is expected to maintain efficacy and function as a

termite barrier in accordance with AS 3660.1-2000;

The TERMITIUM® Physical Termite Barrier has been designed in accordance with a

quality management system that incorporates a set of rules for the design, manufacture,

installation and maintenance of all elements of the system; and

The components used in the manufacture of the TERMITIUM® Physical Termite

Barrier have been selected for their intended purpose and are expected to operate in

accordance with their specification for the duration of the design life of the

TERMITIUM® Physical Termite Barrier


4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Results are summarised in Tables 1 to 8 and are given fully in the Appendices.

4.1 Bait, Mortar and Brick Assessment

Table 1 Agrisearch Services Summary of Results – 3 Months

Bait, Mortar and Brick Assessment Records

Treatment REP Code Termites % Bait Shelter Tube Mortar Shelter Tube

in Bait Damaged on Mortar Damaged on Bricks

1 1 6 No 0 No No No

TERMITIUM® 2 7 No 0 No No Yes

3 8 No 0 Yes No Yes

4 9 No 0 Yes No Yes

5 10 No 0 Yes No Yes

2 1 1 No 0 Yes No Yes

Untreated 2 2 No 0 Yes Yes (1 site) Yes

3 3 No 0 Yes No Yes

4 4 No 0 Yes Yes (1 site) Yes

5 5 No 0 Yes No Yes

There was no damage to mortar on any of the TERMITIUM® treated mortar joints.


bricks and mortar and there was significantly less moisture under the Perspex in the centre

of each of the 5 brick constructions.

Untreated replicate 2 had mortar eaten on one bottom corner to a depth of approximately 1

cm. Untreated replicate 4 had a 5 mm deep x 3 mm diameter hole eaten into the mortar

under a large shelter tube on the side of the brick construction.






TERMITIUM® 2 7 No 0 Yes No Yes

3 8 No 0 Yes No Yes

4 9 No 0 Yes No Yes


2 1 1 No 0 Yes Yes (2 sites) Yes

Untreated 2 2 No 0 Yes Yes (3 sites) Yes

3 3 No 0 Yes No Yes

4 4 No 0 Yes Yes (2 sites) Yes


There was no damage to mortar on any of the TERMITIUM® treated mortar joints

compared to 12 sites on the untreated mortar joints that had visible evidence of termite

damage to the mortar. The most damaging was a 78mm deep penetration in the mortar on

the right side of the untreated replicate 5 construction.


Table 3 Agrisearch Services Summary of Results – 2 Years





TERMITIUM® 2 7 No 0 Yes No Yes

3 8 No 0 Yes No Yes

4 9 No 0 Yes No Yes


2 1 1 No 0 Yes Yes (2 sites) Yes

Untreated 2 2 No 0 Yes Yes (3 sites) Yes




There was no damage to mortar on any of the TERMITIUM® treated mortar joints

compared to 17 sites on the untreated mortar joints that had visible evidence of termite

damage to the mortar. The most damaging was a 78mm deep penetration in the mortar on

the right side of the untreated replicate 5 construction.

4.2 Timber Lining Assessment


Timber Lining Assessment Records

Treatment REP Code No. Timber No. Timber No. Timber

Top Damaged Base Damaged Ends Damaged

1 1 6 26/26 26/26 8/8

TERMITIUM® 2 7 26/26 27/27 8/8

3 8 25/25 25/25 8/8

4 9 22/22 25/25 8/8

5 10 25/25 25/25 8/8

2 1 1 26/26 26/26 8/8

Untreated 2 2 26/26 27/27 8/8

3 3 25/25 25/25 8/8

4 4 22/22 25/25 8/8

5 5 25/25 25/25 8/8




50% of the timber consumed.




Treatment REP Code No. Timber No. Timber No. Timber No. Timber

Top Damaged Base Damaged Ends Damaged Sides Damaged

1 1 6 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

TERMITIUM® 2 7 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

3 8 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

4 9 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

5 10 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

2 1 1 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

Untreated 2 2 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

3 3 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

4 4 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

5 5 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

The damage to the radiata timber pieces around the outside of each treated and untreated

replicate structure was significant during the 9 month period of exposure to the natural

termite population foraging through the soil since the 3 month assessment time. Every

piece of timber was severely structurally damaged with greater than 95% of the timber

consumed.

Table 6 Agrisearch Services Summary of Results –2 Years


Treatment REP Code No. Timber No. Timber No. Timber No. Timber

Top Damaged Base Damaged Ends Damaged Sides Damaged

1 1 6 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

TERMITIUM® 2 7 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

3 8 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

4 9 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

5 10 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

2 1 1 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

Untreated 2 2 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

3 3 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

4 4 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

5 5 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

The damage to the radiata timber pieces around the outside of each treated and untreated

replicate structure was significant during the 12 month period of exposure to the natural

termite population foraging through the soil since the 12 month assessment time. Every

piece of timber was severely structurally damaged with greater than 95% of the timber

consumed.


4.3 Hardness of Bricks and Mortar


Hardness Assessment Records for Bricks and Mortar

Treatment REP Code Rep Mortar (in/mm) Brick (in/mm)

1 1 6 1 0.001/ 0.03 0.002/ 0.05

TERMITIUM® 2 0.002/ 0.05 0.001/ 0.03

3 0.002/ 0.05 0.001/ 0.03

Mean 0.0017/ 0.043 0.0013/ 0.036

Rep Mortar (in/mm) Brick (in/mm)

2 1 1 1 0.010/ 0.25 0.015/ 0.38

Untreated 2 0.004/ 0.10 0.012/ 0.30

3 0.003/ 0.08 0.006/ 0.15

Mean 0.0057/ 0.143 0.011/ 0.276


hardness from M3 Mortar (0.143) to an M4 Mortar (0.043), as the lower the reading the

harder the surface.

Table 8 Agrisearch Services Summary of Results – 2 Years

Hardness Assessment Records for Bricks and Mortar

Treatment REP Code Rep Mortar (in/mm)

1 1 6 1 0.004/ 0.10

TERMITIUM® 2 0.003/ 0.08

3 0.004/ 0.10

Mean 0.0036/ 0.093

Rep Mortar (in/mm)

2 1 1 1 0.026/ 0.66

Untreated 2 0.013/ 0.33

3 0.012/ 0.30

Mean 0.017/ 0.43

At 2 years post-treatment the untreated mortar had an average hardness reading of 0.43mm

which lies between an M2 (0.5mm) and an M3 (0.3mm) mortar. The TERMITIUM®

mortar at 2 years had a hardness reading of 0.093mm and remained an M4 mortar.


5. CONCLUSIONS

There was no damage to mortar on any of the TERMITIUM® treated mortar joints at 3

months, 12 months and 2 years after installation in termite infested soil.


bricks and mortar.

Moisture in the form of condensation under the Perspex in the centre of each of the 5 brick

constructions was greater in the untreated constructions compared to the TERMITIUM®

treated constructions.

Untreated replicate 2 and replicate 4 had mortar consumed by the termites to a depth of 5-

10 mm at one location at 3 months and by 12 months a total of 12 sites of damage to

untreated mortar were recorded. At 2 years 17 mortar damaged sites were recorded with

the deepest mortar penetration being 78 mm.

There were no termites observed in the bait within the TERMITIUM® treated or the

untreated brick and mortar constructions at 3 months, 12 months and 2 years post-

installation.




50% of the timber consumed. At 12 months and 2 years all timber pieces were again

damaged by the termites with greater than 95% of the timber consumed.


hardness of the bricks and mortar at 3 months. The hardness of the mortar was tested

again at 2 years and the TERMITIUM® treated mortar remained harder than the untreated

mortar and maintained classification as an M4 mortar.


6. APPENDICES

6.1 3 Month Assessment - 11 February 2009

Treatment REP Code Termites % Bait Shelter Mortar Shelter No. Timber No. Timber No. Timber

in Bait Damaged Tube on

Mortar

Damaged Tube on

Bricks

Top

Damaged

Base

Damaged

Ends

Damaged

1 1 6 No 0 No No No 26/26 26/26 8/8

TERMITIUM 2 7 No 0 No No Yes 26/26 27/27 8/8

3 8 No 0 Yes No Yes 25/25 25/25 8/8

4 9 No 0 Yes No Yes 22/22 25/25 8/8

5 10 No 0 Yes No Yes 25/25 25/25 8/8

2 1 1 No 0 Yes No Yes 26/26 26/26 8/8

Untreated 2 2 No 0 Yes Yes Yes 26/26 27/27 8/8

3 3 No 0 Yes No Yes 25/25 25/25 8/8

4 4 No 0 Yes Yes Yes 22/22 25/25 8/8

5 5 No 0 Yes No Yes 25/25 25/25 8/8

Notes Treatment 1:

No damage to mortar on any of the TERMITIUM treated mortar joints. All the TERMITIUM treated bricks and mortar were dry compared to the untreated bricks and mortar and there was significantly less

moisture under the perspex in the centre of each of the 5 brick constructions.

Notes Treatment 2:

Untreated replicate 2 had mortar eaten in approximately 1 cm on the bottom corner. Untreated replicate 4 had a 5 mm deep x 3 mm

diameter hole eaten into the mortar under a large shelter tube on the side of the brick construction.

6.2 12 Month Assessment - 11 November 2009

Treatment REP Code Termites % Bait Shelter Mortar Shelter No. No. No. No.


Mortar

Damaged Tube on

Bricks

Timber

Top

Damaged

Timber

Base

Damaged

Timber

Ends

Damaged

Timber

Sides

Damaged

1 1 6 No 0 Yes No Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

TERMITIUM® 2 7 No 0 Yes No Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

3 8 No 0 Yes No Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

4 9 No 0 Yes No Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

5 10 No 0 Yes No Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

2 1 1 No 0 Yes Yes Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

Untreated 2 2 No 0 Yes Yes Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

3 3 No 0 Yes No Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

4 4 No 0 Yes Yes Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

5 5 No 0 Yes Yes Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

Notes Treatment 1 - TERMITIUM®: There was no damage to the mortar joints treated with the TERMITIUM®.

The bricks and mortar were dry and in good condition.

No termites were observed on the timber, cardboard or Styrofoam in the middle of each structural unit.

Notes Treatment 2 - Untreated:

Rep 1, hole 1 - top left corner, 11mm deep, hole 2 - left side, 9mm deep. Rep 2, hole 1 - top right side, 15mm deep x 17mm wide, hole 2 - top left side, 19mm wide x 26mm deep, hole 3 - bottom left side, 9mm

deep x 15mm wide.

Rep 3, no damage to mortar observed. Rep 4, hole 1 - top side, 9mm deep x 5 mm wide, hole 2 - bottom right side, 110mm along mortar x 6mm wide at the corner x 1-2mm

wide towards the middle of the mortar joint.

Rep 5, hole 1 - top left side, 9mm deep x 24mm wide, hole 2 - top right side, 15mm deep x 22mm wide, hole 3 - right side, 5mm deep x 4mm wide, hole 4 - right side, 78mm deep x

23mm wide, hole 5 - bottom left side, 12mm deep x 25mm wide across the corner.


6.3 2 Year Assessment - 11 November 2010

Treatment REP Code Termites % Bait Shelter Mortar Shelter No. No. No. No.


Mortar

Damaged Tube on

Bricks

Timber

Top Damaged

Timber

Base Damaged

Timber

Ends Damaged

Timber

Sides Damaged

1 1 6 No 0 Yes No Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

TERMITIUM® 2 7 No 0 Yes No Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

3 8 No 0 Yes No Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

4 9 No 0 Yes No Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

5 10 No 0 Yes No Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

2 1 1 No 0 Yes Yes Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

Untreated 2 2 No 0 Yes Yes Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

3 3 No 0 Yes Yes Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

4 4 No 0 Yes Yes Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

5 5 No 0 Yes Yes Yes 8/8 8/8 4/4 2/2

Notes Treatment 1 - TERMITIUM®:

There was no damage to the mortar joints treated with the TERMITIUM®.

The bricks and mortar were dry and in good condition. No termites were observed on the timber, cardboard or Styrofoam in the middle of each structural unit.

Replicate 4 had a crack in the mortar along the brick edge top surface on the top side.

Notes Treatment 2 - Untreated:

Rep 1, hole 1 - top left corner, 11mm deep, hole 2 - left side, 9mm deep.

Rep 2, hole 1 - top right side, 16mm deep x 17mm wide, hole 2 - top left side, 20mm wide x 26mm deep, hole 3 - bottom left side, 9mm deep x 15mm wide.

Rep 3, hole 1 - right side, 8mm deep, hole 2 - left side, 12mm deep, hole 3 - top side, 5mm deep. Also the top mortar joint on the top

surface has a crack along the mortar and mortar eaten down 3mm. Rep 4, hole 1 - top side, 9mm deep x 5 mm wide, hole 2 - bottom right side, 110mm along mortar x 7mm wide at the corner x 1-2mm

wide towards the middle of the mortar joint. On the left side there is a chip out of the left corner. On the right side there is an indent in

the mortar but not eaten by the termites. There are cracks in the mortar on the top surface of the structure on the top right and the bottom mortar joints. Considerable white fungal growth was present on the timber, cardboard and bricks in the centre of the structure.

Rep 5, hole 1 - top side left corner, 15mm deep x 20mm wide, hole 2 - top side, 6mm deep x 60mm long, hole 3 - top side right corner,

9mm deep x 25mm long, hole 4 - bottom side left 17mm deep x 25mm long, hole 5 - left side, 24mm deep x 12mm wide on right corner, hole 6 - right side in middle, 25mm wide x 78mm deep, hole 7 - right side on right, 21mm deep x 8mm wide.